Translating John 21:14 and its Significance

2021 ◽  
pp. 001452462110388
Author(s):  
SJ Gerald O’Collins
Keyword(s):  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Passive Voice ◽  
Middle Voice ◽  
Active Involvement ◽  
The Dead ◽  
John's Gospel

In John 21:14, two verbs are, from the viewpoint of syntax, in the passive voice. Do we face here a divine passive—the action of God in raising and revealing the dead Jesus but not explicitly stated as such? Or is this passive voice to be understood as ‘middle’ voice? Jesus inasmuch as he is divine performs the action (resurrection) and ‘receives’ the results of his action, the new risen life in which he appears. By ignoring the possibilities of middle voice, some translations miss the significance of ending John’s Gospel by proclaiming the active involvement of Jesus (as divine) in his own resurrection from the dead and appearance to the disciples—a belief already presented by the Fourth Gospel.

Johannine Commentaries in the Early Church

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Lamb
Keyword(s):  
Early Church ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Christian Doctrine ◽  
The Face ◽  
Greek Tradition ◽  
John's Gospel ◽  
Scholastic Tradition

This chapter sets the making of commentaries on John’s Gospel, particularly within the Greek tradition, in the context of ancient Greek scholarship and the emergence of a scholastic tradition within the early Church. These commentaries drew on established philological conventions in order to clarify ambiguities and complexities within the text. At the same time, they served to amplify the meaning of the text in the face of new questions, controversies and preoccupations. Commentators used John’s Gospel ‘to think with’. With its allusive prose and symbolic discourse, the Fourth Gospel provoked commentators to respond to on-going doctrinal debate and to work out wider questions about Christian doctrine and identity.

Resurrection

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter van Inwagen
Keyword(s):  
Second Temple ◽  
Second Temple Judaism ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Christian Belief ◽  
Rabbinic Judaism ◽  
Early Christian ◽  
Resurrection Of The Dead ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Dead ◽  
Raising Of Lazarus

The Judaeo-Christian belief in a future general resurrection of the dead arose in late second-temple Judaism (see, for example, Daniel 12: 2 and John 11: 24). (Whether there would be a resurrection of the dead was one of the main points that divided the Pharisees and the Sadducees.) When the new Christian movement appeared – before it was clearly something other than a party or sect within Judaism – it centred on the belief that the crucified Jesus of Nazareth had been, in a literal, bodily sense, raised from the dead (resurrectus) and that his resurrection was, in some way, the means by which the expected general resurrection of the dead would be accomplished. Indeed, resurrection was so pervasive a theme in early Christian preaching that it was apparently sometimes thought that Christians worshipped two gods called ‘Jesus’ and ‘Resurrection’ (Anastasis). The early Christians generally said that ‘God raised Jesus from the dead’. In post-New Testament times, it became more common for Christians to say that ‘Jesus rose from the dead’. Belief in the resurrection of Jesus and a future general resurrection continue to be central to Christianity. Christians have always insisted that resurrection is not a mere restoration of what the resurrected person had before death (as in the story in the fourth Gospel of the raising of Lazarus) but is rather a doorway into a new kind of life. The status of a belief in the general resurrection in rabbinic Judaism is difficult to summarize. It should be noted, however, that a belief in the resurrection of the dead is one of Maimonides’ ‘thirteen principles’, which some Jews regard as a summary of the essential doctrines of Judaism. A belief in a general resurrection of the dead is one of many Judaeo-Christian elements that have been incorporated into Islam.

scholarly journals The plenipotentiary idea as Leitmotiv in John’s Gospel

2015 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacobus Kok
Keyword(s):  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Dominant Theme ◽  
John's Gospel

In this article the plenipotentiary idea in John’s Gospel is studied in relation to Jewish institution(s) of agency. It is argued that the missionary idea in John’s Gospel is a Leitmotiv (central or dominant theme) that integrates the Christology and Soteriology in the fourth Gospel. Jesus is presented as being God’s empowered plenipotentiary who was sent by God to give life and to judge – qualities that were judged to be the prerogative of the Creator-God. After the resurrection, Jesus empowers his disciples to become plenipotentiaries who are called to continue the mission that God had started in and through Jesus. Unlike some scholars who argues that John is a sectarian writing aimed at an in-group, the author of this article arguesthat John’s idea of mission is one that encourages an openness towards outsiders, motivated by love and other regarded, and expressed in a boundary transcending manner.Opsomming: Gesantskap as leitmotief in die Johannesevangelie. In hierdie artikel word die konsep van gesantskap in Johannes se Evangelie in verhouding tot die Joodse konsepte van gesantskap bestudeer. Daar word aangevoer dat die missionale of gesantskapskonsep ’n leitmotief (sentrale of dominante tema) in Johannes se Evangelie is, en dat dit met die Christologie en die Soteriologie in die vierde Evangelie geïntegreer is. Jesus word as God segevolmagtigde verteenwoordiger (gesant of plenipotensiaris) aangebied wat deur God gestuur is om lewe te gee en te oordeel – kwaliteite wat tradisioneel gesproke die prerogatief van God alleen is. Ná die opstanding bemagtig Jesus sy dissipels as sy gevolmagtigde verteenwoordigers wat geroep en gestuur is om die doel wat God in en deur Jesus begin het, te kontinueer. In teenstelling met sommige geleerdes wat beweer dat Johannes ’n sektariese geskrif is wat op die ‘in-groep’ in teenstelling met die ‘uit-groep’ gemik is, of dat Johannes geen sensitiwiteit vir buitestanders het nie, argumenteer die outeur van hierdie artikel dat Johannes se idee van sending ’n openheid teenoor buitestanders impliseer wat deur liefde gemotiveer is en op so ’n wyse uitgeleef behoort te word dat dit (sosiale en ander) grense transendeer.

Miracles, Early Modern Science, and Rational Religion

2006 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
pp. 493-510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Harrison
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
New Testament ◽  
Laws Of Nature ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Synoptic Gospels ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Early Modern Science ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
John's Gospel

Readers of the New Testament could be excused for thinking that there is little consistency in the manner in which miracles are represented in the Gospels. Those events typically identified as miracles are variously described as “signs” (semeia), “wonders” (terata), “mighty works” (dunameis), and, on occasion, simply “works” (erga). The absence of a distinct terminology for the miraculous suggests that the authors of the Gospels were not working with a formal conception of “miracle”—at least not in that Humean sense of a “contravention of the laws of nature,” familiar to modern readers. Neither is there a consistent position on the evidentiary role of these events. In the synoptic Gospels—Matthew, Mark, and Luke—Jesus performs miracles on account of the faith of his audience. In John's Gospel, however, it is the performance of miracles that elicits faith. Even in the fourth Gospel, moreover, the role of miracles as signs of Christ's divinity is not straightforward. Thus those who demand a miracle are castigated: “Unless you see signs and wonders you will not believe.” Finally, signs and wonders do not provide unambiguous evidence of the sanctity of the miracle worker or of the truth of their teachings. Accordingly, the faithful were warned (in the synoptic Gospels at least) that “false Christs and false prophets will rise and show signs and wonders [in order] to deceive.”

Gloria in Profundis: Comparing the Glory of Moses in Sirach to Jesus in the Fourth Gospel

2014 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-78
Author(s):  
Nijay K. Gupta
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Passion Narrative ◽  
Ben Sira ◽  
Presence Of God ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
John's Gospel ◽  
The One ◽  
Double Nature

Abstract The glory of Jesus is a leitmotif of the Fourth Gospel and probably reflects both the Shekinah “glory” of Israel’s God revealed in Jesus as well as honor attributed to Jesus by John. The Jewish wisdom teacher Ben Sira also employs glorification language frequently and carefully in Sirach. Bringing these two texts into conversation illuminates the peculiar and unique ways in which John portrayed the identity of Jesus. In Sirach 45:1-5, in particular, Ben Sira praised the glory of Moses—a man beloved of God, made equal to the angels, great before his enemies, powerful in word, intrepid before kings, sanctified in faithfulness, party to the holy presence of God, and privy to the secret things of God. Given that John also had much interest in Moses comparison and typology, setting these texts side-by-side brings to the forefront the double-nature of the Fourth Gospel’s glory-Christology. On the one hand, the Johannine Jesus offered great demonstrations of power and authoritative teaching. On the other hand, he fared quite the opposite as Ben Sira’s vision of the exalted Moses, especially in John’s passion narrative where Jesus appears frail, weak, shamed, and defeated. Comparing the Moses of Sirach to the Jesus of John’s Gospel especially reveals the Evangelist’s paradoxical theology of gloria in profundis—the humble glory of God demonstrated in Jesus.

Ideological Readings of the Fourth Gospel

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Warren Carter
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
The Political ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Ideological Criticism ◽  
John's Gospel

This article outlines a theoretical framework of ideological criticism and illustrates it with a number of recent discussions of John’s Gospel that utilize ideological and postcolonial approaches, often from specific personal, political, and social ‘locations’ of enquiry. It also examines analyses of John’s engagement with the personnel and structures of power of the imperializing-colonizing Roman empire. By identifying a significant body of current scholarship that employs these approaches the article demonstrates the vitality of questions asked and insights gained; arguing that the political contexts and implications both of the Gospel and of any reading are unavoidable, it invites mainstream Johannine studies to examine its own, often unspecified, ideological commitments.

Engaging scripture: incarnation and the Gospel of John

2007 ◽  
Vol 60 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-160
Author(s):  
Angus Paddison
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Gospel Of John ◽  
Fourth Gospel ◽  
Christian Tradition ◽  
Dynamic Relationship ◽  
John's Gospel

This article presents a theological engagement with the Christ of the Gospel of John. Christology has two basic responsibilities. First, all Christology is required to demonstrate that it is rooted in scriptural reading. Second, consistent attentiveness needs to be paid to the dynamic relationship between Christ's person and work. The nature of these two responsibilities is elucidated by exploring some recent christological contributions. The remainder of the essay engages with the encounter at the centre of the Fourth Gospel: that in the Word made flesh the eternal love between the Father and the Son is unfolded into the time of this world. Jesus' life and ministry is the decisive meeting of time and eternity. Counsel is then offered for how John's Gospel may faithfully be read in line with this subject matter. Important objections to ‘Logos’ Christologies, and Johannine Christology in particular, are introduced. This article then proceeds to argue for the realistic meeting of all that is human and all that is divine in the person of Jesus who lives a life of loving obedience to the Father. Throughout, this article maintains a conversation with the Fourth Gospel, the ontological implications of this text, and those voices from within Christian tradition that can help us in the reading of John.

The Old Testament Witness

2019 ◽  
pp. 91-113
Author(s):  
Matthew Levering
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Old Testament ◽  
Hebrew Bible ◽  
Biblical Scholarship ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
The Dead ◽  
John's Gospel

In contemporary biblical scholarship that investigates the question of whether Jesus of Nazareth was raised from the dead, scholars generally pay some attention to the Old Testament. The first part of this chapter therefore examines the findings of the New Testament scholars Dale Allison and N. T. Wright and the Hebrew Bible scholar Jon Levenson. The chapter next examines St. Thomas Aquinas’s use of the Old Testament in commenting on John 20–1, the chapters of John’s Gospel that treat Jesus’ Resurrection appearances. In his commentary, of course, Aquinas is not attempting to investigate the historicity of Jesus’ Resurrection. Commenting on John 20–1, Aquinas includes 139 quotations from the Old Testament. The chapter argues that the verses selected by Aquinas play a valuable cumulative role in supporting the truth of the claim that Jesus rose from the dead.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document